This conversation between me and Disqus user RhubarbForFingers started as a reflection on the state of microtransactions and day one patches in the upcoming Xbox One racing blockbuster Forza Motorsport 7, and steered rapidly towards an exchange of outlooks into the gaming industry as a whole and its state. Some recurring trends we're seeing as of late might be the sign of an industry in a state of hardship, possibly in need of some kind of reform in the interest of self sustainability. Disclaimer: lengthy dialogue.
Me:
Forza 7 is just the tip of an emerging trend in AAA products. It may have come from any
other manifacturer, so I won't condemn the game as much as the phenomenon: unfortunate as it is, it's up to the Xbox fans to make the company aware that this won't sit well with them - dammit, it shouldn't sit well with anyone forking out 60~70$/€ upfront for any game. But yesterday was Nintendo (in their own special ways), today it's Microsoft, tomorrow it's going to be Sony. I think microtransactions in high profile games are an industry-wide issue, not a banner related one, and something we all should be vocal about.
RhubarbForFingers:
"But yesterday was Nintendo (in their own special ways), today it's Microsoft, tomorrow it'sgoing to be Sony."
Yup. I will be amazed if the new Gran Turismo game doesn't have some monetisation
mechanisms in it. And Nintendo are already locking modes and other content away behind the purchase of plastic toys. I totally appreciate this is a business. I fully empathise with a publisher's need to generate revenue. I think it's 100% fair. Games cost much more to make today than they did 20 years ago. People's expectations are higher. Yet the RRPs have stayed the same. You don't need a degree in economics to know that that's not sustainable. It's unreasonable to expect otherwise.
As a consumer, I'm not required to care about any of that. I'll vote with my wallet.
Talk, especially internet talk, is cheap. It's de rigeur to express your outrage. How we act
matters far more. And, historically, we're not very good at sticking to our guns or accepting the consequences of our actions.
Me:
As much as I understand where you're coming from - your points are all fair - it is hard not to see certain business practices as devoid of regard towards the main source of revenue, the consumers.
The practices I'm talking about concerns things like releasing gigantic day one patches to
include entire game modes, shipping with glaring bugs that even the laxest of QA
departments should have pointed out, or locking basic functions behind paywalls.
These are horror stories in the relationship between studios and publishers, not physiological realities of modern game development that we're graciously supposed to accept. I mean, why should I do that when publishers are not willing to extend their deadlines for the sake of shipping an acceptable product at launch? People who proceeds with their day one purchases oblivious of it all are part of the problem, as they actively push the spiral further down for everybody else.
As consumers, I guess we have every right to get full fledged products in exchange for early, upfront full price purchases. I refer to complete experiences that are not clearly and
arbitrarily mutilated or riddled with major bugs. Of course devs and publishers have every right to expand on the base material, provided that base material is... a full game. One that can stand on its own legs. While this is increasingly not the case for many high profile games, there are other products out there showing how what I'm talking about is not science fiction - it can be done, it is factually possible to ship AAA games in a complete state and sell them very well. It only requires better coordination, working pipelines and professionalism from everyone in the backend.
P.S.: I'm totally ready for that in GT Sport. Totally and sadly so.
